Saw a news story about this yesterday. I haven't read the report, but if someone has, or has more info about it: have they ruled out the correlation/causation factor? Perhaps someone who takes aspirin daily is more inclined to take better care of themselves overall?

I've read (not remembering where) that many cancers have been correlated to chronic low-level general inflammation. Likely an aspirin regiment impacts that factoring. If this is the case the same could be addressed comparably through healthier diets and exercise. Pursuing pill solutions is much more American though.

Nexzus:Saw a news story about this yesterday. I haven't read the report, but if someone has, or has more info about it: have they ruled out the correlation/causation factor? Perhaps someone who takes aspirin daily is more inclined to take better care of themselves overall?

Or other factors, like people who take aspirin are much less likely to regularly take acetaminophen or ibuprofen, maybe they have some relation to it?

Or that a huge group of people who take aspirin are those typically cannot take either of the aforementioned painkillers (due to a history of clotting or interactions or whatnot).

Yeah, pretty much what Nexzus said. Even if the doctors said 'Group A take aspirin daily, group B don't,' I'm sure not everyone in group A took aspirin every day. Did they throw out the ones that didn't? Goes back to the whole if they are going to take aspirin every day for 20 years they are more likely to exercise regularly and eat better as well.

BlazeTrailer:I've read (not remembering where) that many cancers have been correlated to chronic low-level general inflammation. Likely an aspirin regiment impacts that factoring. If this is the case the same could be addressed comparably through healthier diets and exercise. Pursuing pill solutions is much more American though.

Seems to coincide with another of their findings:

"And while cautioning that more research is necessary to build on this "proof of principle," the authors suggested that people who embark on a long-term, low-dose aspirin regimen in their late 40s and 50s are probably the ones who stand to benefit the most."

Late 40s/50s being people that have probably stopped working out and possibly eating right. Though it appears to provide a slight benefit for the younger test subjects. I'm guessing it is more beneficial for people that don't eat right and work out then people who do, but that wouldn't necessarily mean it wont help those working out a little bit.

BlazeTrailer:I've read (not remembering where) that many cancers have been correlated to chronic low-level general inflammation. Likely an aspirin regiment impacts that factoring. If this is the case the same could be addressed comparably through healthier diets and exercise. Pursuing pill solutions is much more American though.

It goes back to Virchow in the 1860s - he was the first to connect chronic inflammation with cancer. There are a host of reasons for the connection: immune cells release reactive oxygen species to destroy invaders but can also damage DNA in cells, immune response generates a whole bunch of molecular signals that act as pro-growth signals in cancer cells, etc.

bad_blood:It goes back to Virchow in the 1860s - he was the first to connect chronic inflammation with cancer. There are a host of reasons for the connection: immune cells release reactive oxygen species to destroy invaders but can also damage DNA in cells, immune response generates a whole bunch of molecular signals that act as pro-growth signals in cancer cells, etc.

Actually for those of us interested in the science behing low-carb diets, this finding isn't too suprising. It's well known that aspiring generally works its magic by blocking micro hormones in the body called eicosaniods, of which there are two series, production of one is triggered by insulin, the other by glucagon. The Insulin series Eicos tend to contstrict airways and bloodvessels, speed blood clotting, and encourage rapid cellular proliferation which can be linked to cancer. The Glucagon ons do the opposite. Since the average American diet is such that most people produce more insulin that glucagon, the eicos most likely to be present, and therefore blocked, by aspirin are the Insulin series which includes the eicos linked to tumor and cancer growth

bad_blood:BlazeTrailer: I've read (not remembering where) that many cancers have been correlated to chronic low-level general inflammation. Likely an aspirin regiment impacts that factoring. If this is the case the same could be addressed comparably through healthier diets and exercise. Pursuing pill solutions is much more American though.

It goes back to Virchow in the 1860s - he was the first to connect chronic inflammation with cancer. There are a host of reasons for the connection: immune cells release reactive oxygen species to destroy invaders but can also damage DNA in cells, immune response generates a whole bunch of molecular signals that act as pro-growth signals in cancer cells, etc.

if anyone's interested in the technical stuff: Link (new window)

/molecular biologist studying cancer and inflammation

That's interesting. So why would anyone expect aspirin to have greater effect than any drug with anti-inflammatory properties?

And I stand by my diet/exercise comment. I know some types of foods are tied to such inflammation more than other types. I don't remember the theorized physiology behind the exercise piece though.

GutFunk:Yeah, pretty much what Nexzus said. Even if the doctors said 'Group A take aspirin daily, group B don't,' I'm sure not everyone in group A took aspirin every day. Did they throw out the ones that didn't? Goes back to the whole if they are going to take aspirin every day for 20 years they are more likely to exercise regularly and eat better as well.

According to the article it was a 5 year study, and they were provided with low doses of Aspirin to take daily (75mg). This isn't a case of let's look at a bunch of people and figure out what they have in common.

...and so the doctor says "Take two red pills every morning with a glass of water, take the yellow pill with a glass of water after lunch, and take three blue pills with a glass of water just before going to bed each night. Follow this regimen for 3 weeks" The patient asks "That's an awful lot of pills; what seems to be the problem?"

Nexzus:Saw a news story about this yesterday. I haven't read the report, but if someone has, or has more info about it: have they ruled out the correlation/causation factor? Perhaps someone who takes aspirin daily is more inclined to take better care of themselves overall?

All the people that I know that take aspirin daily were told to do so by their doctor because of heart conditions(or heart attacks).

It's not that there's hate for aspirin, just that all medical boards and groups are super careful about just saying "hey, take anti inflammatories forever". Look what happened with people taking Cox-2 inhibitors chronically (CV risk). And if you want a look at what happens when they do deliberate and carefully release new guidelines, check out the news twisting the new mammogram schedules earlier this year - they basically made it sound like the NIH wanted women to die. They're sort of in a no win scenario when it comes to consumers and not talking directly to physicians.

Magorn:Actually for those of us interested in the science behing low-carb diets, this finding isn't too suprising. It's well known that aspiring generally works its magic by blocking micro hormones in the body called eicosaniods, of which there are two series, production of one is triggered by insulin, the other by glucagon. The Insulin series Eicos tend to contstrict airways and bloodvessels, speed blood clotting, and encourage rapid cellular proliferation which can be linked to cancer. The Glucagon ons do the opposite. Since the average American diet is such that most people produce more insulin that glucagon, the eicos most likely to be present, and therefore blocked, by aspirin are the Insulin series which includes the eicos linked to tumor and cancer growth

If you want to get more molecular biology-y, the whole prostaglandin metabolism pathway is rife with transient by products that induce inflammation (i.e, PGE2)

Makes sense. The reason you take it to ward off heart attacks is because inflammation makes plaque in your blood vessels unstable & squishy, making it much more likely to burst & cause the blood clot that blocks the artery & kills you.

happydude45:Makes sense. The reason you take it to ward off heart attacks is because inflammation makes plaque in your blood vessels unstable & squishy, making it much more likely to burst & cause the blood clot that blocks the artery & kills you.

Actually, the reason it's given for heart disease patients is that it causes an irreversible anti-thrombotic effect by farking up platelets' COX-1 enzyme.

there you have it. simple. but no drug pusher is going to tell you that because he won't be able to sell you more drugs.

You forgot a few: "inherit good genes" "no smoking" and "don't work around known carcinogens." I see you included nicotine but it's not the nicotine in tobacco that kills, it's the known cancer causing agents in the inhaled smoke.

there you have it. simple. but no drug pusher is going to tell you that because he won't be able to sell you more drugs.

Then explain to me why cancer was rampant in ancient Egypt. They ate tons of totally organic foods heavy on the whole grains and light on the red meat, got plenty of exercise, nary a one of them smoked, most slept from sundown to sun-up, and they liked to do things as a community, like bang out pyramids

there you have it. simple. but no drug pusher is going to tell you that because he won't be able to sell you more drugs.

Then explain to me why cancer was rampant in ancient Egypt. They ate tons of totally organic foods heavy on the whole grains and light on the red meat, got plenty of exercise, nary a one of them smoked, most slept from sundown to sun-up, and they liked to do things as a community, like bang out pyramids

Nexzus:Saw a news story about this yesterday. I haven't read the report, but if someone has, or has more info about it: have they ruled out the correlation/causation factor? Perhaps someone who takes aspirin daily is more inclined to take better care of themselves overall?

or that chronic aspirin takers die of liver disease before cancer ever has a chance to take hold?

there you have it. simple. but no drug pusher is going to tell you that because he won't be able to sell you more drugs.

Then explain to me why cancer was rampant in ancient Egypt. They ate tons of totally organic foods heavy on the whole grains and light on the red meat, got plenty of exercise, nary a one of them smoked, most slept from sundown to sun-up, and they liked to do things as a community, like bang out pyramids

What makes you think diets that are heavy in whole grains are healthy?